Israel and The State of Israel are not the same thing.

[Truthseeker]

Is Israel "oppressed"? Yes, at least in that the necessity for maintaining a strong defense is oppressive. The more resources and time that must be put in one's defense, the less prosperous one can be.

Yes, Israel and its government are not the same, but we should not ever lose sight of that the people support the government on the whole. The Sabra and Shatila massacre scandal in 1982 did not topple the government. Even if the government does more evil, I doubt there would be rebellion.

[KingsGambit]

Yes, Israel and its government are not the same, but we should not ever lose sight of that the people support the government on the whole. The Sabra and Shatila massacre scandal in 1982 did not topple the government. Even if the government does more evil, I doubt there would be rebellion.

Not only that, but the borders of the modern day nation of Israel are nothing close to what the nation was defined as in the Bible.

[One Bad Pig]

The country the jews are currently referring to as 'Israel' is not Israel. No Christian ought to support The State of Israel, thinking he's thereby taking part in fulfilling a commandment of God.

The State of Israel certainly does not support Christians. They'll take our tourist dollars, but AFAIR Jewish Christians are not considered Jews for the purpose of moving to Israel, the Palestinian Christians are treated no better than the Arabs, and Christian archeological finds in Jerusalem are paved over once the archeologists have some time to poke around instead of being restored like Jewish archeological finds.

[Paprika]

The country the jews are currently referring to as 'Israel' is not Israel. No Christian ought to support The State of Israel, thinking he's thereby taking part in fulfilling a commandment of God.

On further thought, an line of thought suggests itself: from a 'supersessionist' point of view, the Israelis have rejected their Messiah and God. Without His blessing, they attempt to hold onto the Promised Land by force.

Is this not folly?

[Spartacus]

You consider the Old Covenant binding on them, yet refuse them the means to live it out?

[Leonhard]

The most defensible (i.e. not based on niche readings of apocalyptic texts) theological endorsement of the modern state of Israel is predicated on a rejection of supersessionism-- that is, it depends on the belief that the New Covenant did not render the Old entirely null and void from then on. For what it's worth, the Second Vatican Council, in the document Nostra Aetate, cited Romans 11:28-29 as support for a rejection of supersessionism, though it is not immediately clear, even from a Catholic perspective, whether there are limits to the covenant's staying power with respect to certain grants or stipulations.

Whenever The Catholic Church talks about Zion, about Israel today, in the real theological context, its as a reference to The Church. The country occupied by modern post-temple Judaism does not apply. I don't think Nostra Aetate does much to change this, aside from affirming that anti-semitism is bad, and that the The Church should foster more positive relationship with modern jews, and put more of an emphasis on the handover of rituals from temple-judaism, which makes sense given the context of the celebration of mass, and the vestment worn by priests, etc...

[Paprika]

You consider the Old Covenant binding on them, yet refuse them the means to live it out?

Was not the Mosaic Law still binding on them when they went into exile?

[Sparko]

Was not the Mosaic Law still binding on them when they went into exile?

I think the Mosaic Law went away when Jesus was crucified. The Israelites had broken the covenant over and over and over and over again. By their own doing, it was null and void, even though God kept it in place until Jesus came and fulfilled it. So I don't think there is any mosaic law for the Jews to follow today. They either have to accept Jesus, or be treated like any other non-believer.

[Jedidiah]

How are unbelieving Jews today any less Israel than were the largely rebellious and God rejecting Jews of much of the Old Testament revelations?

[Leonhard]

How are unbelieving Jews today any less Israel than were the largely rebellious and God rejecting Jews of much of the Old Testament revelations?

In what way are they like the Jews at the time of Jesus?

[Jedidiah]

What I am asking is in fact; What constitutes a "legitimate" Israel in your opinion? How does the modern version fail that definition?

[Spartacus]

I think the Mosaic Law went away when Jesus was crucified. The Israelites had broken the covenant over and over and over and over again. By their own doing, it was null and void, even though God kept it in place until Jesus came and fulfilled it. So I don't think there is any mosaic law for the Jews to follow today. They either have to accept Jesus, or be treated like any other non-believer.

OK, so you're pretty definitively a supersessionist, given that you've attempted no theological defense of the nation-state of Israel, you seem to be consistent in that.

That having been said, Leonhard raises a worthwhile point in that it's easier to see Christianity as replacing Judaism, particularly the Judaism that existed in the time of Christ, if we have concrete ways in which we maintain that Jewish legacy.

Also worthy of note in any discussion of modern Judaism is the fact that it is descended from the synagogue-centric tradition (identified, iirc, with the pharisees), since the the temple-centered saducees couldn't maintain their practices after the Romans destroyed the Temple.

[Spartacus]

Pap, would you be satisfied by the formulation that Jews are obligated to follow the Old Covenant insofar as they are reasonably able to?

[KingsGambit]

Wasn't the land promise to Israel contingent upon a nationwide faithful following of the Mosaic law? I think it would be difficult to argue that this condition has been fulfilled.

[Paprika]

I think the Mosaic Law went away when Jesus was crucified.

On that premise, do the Israelis have any special God-given right to the land?